May 2026· arXiv.org· Vol abs/2605.25868· 0 citations· 45 references
Computer Science
TL;DR
The findings prove that cBCI synergy is heavily contingent on the temporal dynamics of trust, providing a critical framework for designing dynamically gated Human-AI systems.
Abstract
The speed and accuracy of an artificial teammate fundamentally alter the failure states of Human-AI integration. While high-speed AI interventions risk inducing reflexive blind compliance, delayed interventions can induce ambiguous cognitive conflict. This study investigates how the fundamental characteristics of an in-task AI assistant, Fast/Less-Accurate (FLA-AI) versus Slow/Accurate (SA-AI) impact the synergy of Collaborative Brain-Computer Interface (cBCI) teams in a Virtual Reality drone task. Seventeen operators completed continuous search tasks under high cognitive workload while their spatial covariance was mapped using a 2D Adaptive Riemannian Oracle. The results mathematically demonstrate that AI timing dictates the mechanism of team failure. Fast AI induced instant, blind compliance; human accuracy under deception collapsed to 50.2%, and pure behavioural teams (N=8) failed to scale beyond 74.1%. In contrast, Slow AI induced delayed cognitive conflict; humans hesitated (61.1% accuracy), but N=8 behavioural teams eventually recovered to 100.0%. Crucially, the Riemannian Oracle mathematically adapted to these states: it heavily restricted temporal windows (<0.8s) to intercept fast reflexive compliance, while widening windows (>1.2s) to capture delayed cognitive conflict. Integrating these isolated veridical signals via Hybrid Fusion successfully rescued the Fast AI team (+7.6% at N=8) and significantly accelerated the recovery of smaller Slow AI teams (+6.9% at N=4). These findings prove that cBCI synergy is heavily contingent on the temporal dynamics of trust, providing a critical framework for designing dynamically gated Human-AI systems.
AI assistance can improve performance without improving self-assessment. We report a study (N=366) comparing Human alone and Human+AI performance on reasoning tasks, for which the AI model is benchmarked on the same items. Participants estimated global and block performance and rated confidence in their answers. Human+...
Daniela Fernandes, Michelle Rausch, A. M. Kloft et al.· 0 citations
Transparency may improve coordination efficiency without affecting trust or team effectiveness in newly formed Human–AI teams, suggesting transparency may improve coordination efficiency without affecting trust or team effectiveness.
Spencer S. Onstot, Eric T. Greenlee, Gregory J. Funke et al.· Proceedings of the Human Fac...· 0 citations
People increasingly reason with large language models (LLMs), yet complementary capabilities do not guarantee outperforming both components. In a between-subjects study, participants (N=535) solved a 40-item battery of matrix reasoning, mental rotation, syllogisms, and letter-string analogies, unaided or with GPT-5.6-L...
Robin Welsch, Michelle Rausch, Pascal Knierim et al.· 0 citations
As artificial intelligence (AI) systems increasingly engage users in value-laden discussions, a key concern is whether they shape not only what people decide but how confident they feel. We examined confidence amplification, shifts in certainty without decision reversals, in human–AI moral decision-making. In a 2 (Time...
Meng-Yao Li, Trevor Patten, Nishthaa Lekhi et al.· Proceedings of the Human Fac...· 0 citations
This work examines how six decision-support mechanisms affect engagement, trust, and collaborative task performance in a diabetes meal-planning scenario and argues for a contextual, balanced pairing of CFF and XAI design that accounts for interactivity, decision frequency, and task complexity.
Oliver Henderson· International Journal of Com...· 0 citations
It is argued that treating the human and the model as a single joint cognitive system is the central design principle for the next generation of decision systems.
Ashore-Onisemo Funmilayo· INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOC...· 0 citations
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 7, 2026
Students in MIT’s Concourse program delve deeply into the human condition, debate challenging questions, and learn to develop judgment about issues that can’t be quantified.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduSep 25, 2026